Age and Paying for Weddings

[Anonymous]

You don't have to pay for weddings, but if you do, please make any strings clear from the start so they can decline. We eloped because I knew my parents were incredibly controlling with money and I didn't want to deal and we aren't into being the center of attention. They insisted on throwing a celebration and made it clear they controlled everything. We allowed it to keep the peace, but never wanted it. This celebration has been thrown in my face for decades. We also were told we were getting $10,000 to put toward furniture, etc. Very generous-right? Everything needed approval and commentary and guilt trips. After all the hoops to use a few thousand we decided to pay for the rest ourselves. They try to guilt trip us about that and seem to forget we didn't use most of that "gift."

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand why your kid needs to be punished for *your* age when they get married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why your kid needs to be punished for *your* age when they get married.

It's only punishment if you view having your wedding paid for as an entitlement. OP - if you can't afford to pay for a wedding in your retirement, then you don't have to. It would be foolish to spend the funds on a wedding.

[Anonymous]

No, you are not. It’s not 1950.

I plan to help but not pay for the whole wedding. I also don’t plan to meddle in their decision to get married and when. They go together.

[Anonymous]

What does your age have to do with paying for a wedding or not? Either you have some $$ to help the soon to be newlyweds or you don't.

We also have funds for weddings, earmarked $50k for each of 3 kids. If they use it for a wedding, down-payment, or whatever, we don't care - we will give them the money, what they do with it is their choice

[Anonymous]

Boomers suck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:


You must be wealthy. The vast majority of people cannot save for retirement, college AND a “marriage fund.”


+1

PP must be VERY wealthy! I can't imagine normal feds or regular, every day jobs in this area allowing for that.

if I have learned anything from this board it is that wealthy is a matter of opinion. DH is retired military, now in a second career and I have a good but not great salary. But we both had a lot of savings before marriage and kids. DH was ROTC so no loans. I worked two jobs before kids and we lived off one salary for years. The thread about saving money early is spot on.
DH is from the south and I don’t think it is unusual for people there to have wedding funds.

[Anonymous]

My husband and I are in our 50s. When we got married in our 30s, neither of our parents planned to pay for our wedding and we would not have asked them to do so. Ultimately, my parents ended up contributing certain things. We paid for a lot ourselves. His parents invited more than 250 people so he basically told them if that was the kind of list they wanted, they need to contribute (our guest list was 450 total). My guess is we paid 50% and each set of parents contributed about 25%. We did cake and finger foods at the church for hundreds of people and then an actual party later that night that only about 85 people were invited to attend. The fact my in-laws wanted to invite their entire small town of 300 people is now hilarious, but was sort of annoying at the time.

I don’t even think about whether I will pay for my kid’s wedding. Fewer people are even bothering to get married. And we could be dead before she gets married. We will play it by ear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Boomers suck.

Age 45 is not a boomer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Boomers suck.

This isn’t about boomers. And regardless there is no obligation to pay for a wedding. Do it if you want and don’t if you don’t want. And definitely don’t if you can’t afford to or if doing so will mean you can’t afford your retirement. Weddings are not a necessity.

[Anonymous]

You had all those extra years to save compared to me who had my kids at 24 and 26.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Boomers suck.

Age 45 is not a boomer

Op had her child at 45.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why your kid needs to be punished for *your* age when they get married.

It's only punishment if you view having your wedding paid for as an entitlement. OP - if you can't afford to pay for a wedding in your retirement, then you don't have to. It would be foolish to spend the funds on a wedding.

I agree with you that paying for a wedding is a nice to have. However, go re-read the OP. She hates her child and is obvious about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pay for the wedding, yes. Parents don’t host baby showers.

Plenty of moms host baby showers for their daughters. What are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay for the wedding, yes. Parents don’t host baby showers.

Plenty of moms host baby showers for their daughters. What are you talking about?

Not PP, but she's talking about traditional etiquette, which says family members don't host showers (not here to fight about it, just saying that's the rule, which as you've noticed many people ignore)